Comments by Charlie Gardner
June 27, 2008
Typical sniping. If you don't like the message, attack the messenger. The house across the street from me was developed on an infill lot and had to put in a well (not enough water). The tunnel project my company is currently constructing has enough water coming out of the mountain to relieve the moratorium. What has MWSD done to make that available? Restrict it to fire suppression in the Tunnel only. Most level headed people will recognize that we need to plan long term for our water needs. We have…
June 26, 2008
Leonard, When an infill lot is "developed" under our existing PUD ("Planned" Urban Development) zoning, and has to install a well because the district cannot supply an adequate source of water, to me that is just plain wrong. If consolidation undermines your version of "local control" maybe its time for other locals to control. The "use it or lose it" scenario comes into play only if the tax money is not properly applied. Offsetting the costs of water and sewer service is an appropriate application.…
June 26, 2008
Paul, I suggest until such time as MWSD can provide enough water to lift the moratorium, provide homeowners with failed wells access to water, and enough storage for fire suppression, that you continue to use the money for exactly what it is meant, "a portion of your 1% property tax money offsets costs of your water and sewer service". I believe consolidation of our Districts would provide an opportunity to focus on the needs of the entire Coastside community. Spend the money on water and sewer.…
May 23, 2008
Kevin, I know how upsetting this must be for you not to get your way on this one, but the true facts are that it is a local grass roots effort in support of this bill. The fact is that there were more letters in support than opposed by a margin of almost 3-1. If you discounted the form faxes sent from outside our local community by people coerced into believing your myth that this bill will strike down the State's environmental protections, the local support margin of passage is increased significantly.…
December 18, 2007
You're right Barry. A road would mean less homes, but it could provide the traffic mitigation the Coastal Commision would be looking for, So, perhaps it does aid the developer(s). I think we are on the same page when we all say we are looking for solutions to this mess.
Another word for "Solidarity" could be found in "Mitigation"?
December 18, 2007
Barry, Not all of Beechwood is "wet". In fact, using even the most stringent delineation made, there is still room for a corridor that could provide an alternate traffic route to relieve congestion at the Hwy 1/92 bottleneck. This would not be favorable to the potential developers, but it would be to those of us who travel through this area. This is why CCF has brought this back as an opportunity to re-look at our options while there is still time. A new delineation based on the City's accepted LCP…
November 05, 2007
Ken,
Thanks for asking about the new middle school. Last week we poured the foundations for the new addition and the new library. We have a substantial financial reserve, and our test scores show continual improvement. "Concrete" results, no web links, just facts.
Don't forget to vote tommorrow, lest you get caught up in detraction distractions.
November 05, 2007
Terry Gossett is a Director of Coastside Community First as am I. CCF is a educational non-profit 501c3 and as such, does not engage in endorsements in any political activity. That doesn't mean its members do not actively engage as individuals. Put Community First (PCF) is a PAC with the express purpose of endorsements which is lead by Freda Jeffs, and other community leaders. Terry (and I) are not on their Board. But, since I am here and responding as an individual, I think it's important we weigh…
June 22, 2007
Barry, I think Debra asks some basic (not confused) questions that go directly to the point of this discussion. They are, from her column: "Why was the land purchased at a price higher than the appraised value and without public input? • Why was the existence of the appraisal and the subsequent due diligence report withheld from the public? • What is the plan to raise the $3.1 million just to own the land and have it sit, unusable, as is? What's the plan to raise the $10.4 million to make it…
June 02, 2007
Barry,
A minor correction. Kiewit Pacific will begin the detour on Tuesday night.
April 04, 2007
"In other words" is not what this Act says. What it says is specific, "Where existing or planned public works facilities can accommodate only a limited amount of new development, services...shall not be precluded by other development.” Perhaps the more progressive approach would be to provide the "essential public services" as a priority to support the basic public need to adequate roads, water, sewer, and schools. I haven't checked, but I bet this is what Supervisor Rich Gordon actually favors.
December 05, 2006
Kevin Lansing actually makes an intuitive inquiry here with a request for an analysis of the settlement agreement if the CDP is not issued. I noted he referenced the CCF website where the agreement is posted. CCF just delivered our comments on the DEIR to the City yesterday, which we hope can provide additional insight to this complex question.
The link is http://www.coastsidecommunityfirst.com/infra/terracedeir.html
Enjoy the read,
Charlie
November 01, 2006
Ric Lohman is well known for participating in the very tactics which he decries which is no exception in this latest posting. The most recent action taken by Coastside Community First was a direct mailing to everyone on the Coastside about Disaster Preparedness and what to do in the event of an emergency. This comprised a team of dozens of coastsiders over several days just to prepare the mailings, and provided what we felt was a much needed benefit to the community. We believe actions speak louder…
September 05, 2006
Hi Ken, Great alliteration! You left off, "...the paltry and pitiful pile of pumpkins produced..", are in fact the "prideful point of the population from Pescadero to Point Montara." Sure, some "enviro" types voted for Measure S (although not to the point purported in Coastsider in my opinion), and even a few worked many hours for the failed ballot measure. But one is not as you term "misinformed" when the record clearly shows the effort to back the other failed Measure D which would have red-lined…
September 02, 2006
The "ruse" to which I dismiss, either as an elected official, or a simple member of this community is hiding behind the attractive premise of protecting the environment to stop any and all development, whether it is for schools, infrastructure,or the hated building contractor. Even Mr. Lansing trundles out a form filed with USFWS as an "official detrmination" when all that is is a form entered into a database as a result of some individuals alleged observation. Much was made and said about the timing…
September 02, 2006
To my knowledge, there has been no documented find of any "listed" species on the Wavecrest site. The closest documented find of record that I know of is a SF Garter snake in the vicinity of the recently completed Pilarcitos Creek crossing project by Strawflower Plaza nearly a mile away.(Funny, that project received a mitigated negative declaration to proceed inside a riparian corridor with the City as the Lead agency). The "potential habitat" identified by one or more of several wetland delineations…
June 27, 2006
Ken, Perhaps you and Don Bacon are both correct. If the court found in the Bolsa Chica decision (which seems analogous to Foothill)that,“neither residential development in the wetlands nor destruction of the pond (for the widening of Warner Road) are permitted.”and, that “wetlands could be eliminated if needed for a road or highway,” As long as houses are not placed in the wetlands, and no ponds are destroyed, a route could be found that provides a road that skirts the majority of the established…
June 16, 2006
Mike, Let's be accurate and avoid any spin here. Where has CCF suggested expansion of Pacific Ridge or pushing the landowner to "build more than he's agreed to build"? What we have done is called the community's attention to what could be a flawed agreement that could impact our options to improve traffic congestion. The old tactic of suggesting linkage to development will not go unchallenged. I would suggest that CCF may have not neccesarily acted in the best interests of the developers in this…
June 15, 2006
On the contrary Barry, the reason alternative transportation solutions are being proposed is that our community needs the foresight of advance planning to accomodate even the 1% growth rate stipulated by Measure D. Even with the slide fixed, we will still endure unacceptable congestion, and it will only continue to get worse. It is shortsighted to lay significant blame on the school board for bussing, that is a part of the bigger picture and one which the Board is committed to address, but not at…
June 09, 2006
Mr. Johnson,
I do not know what you heard at the meeting last night. What I did say is that it is my understanding Dwight Wilson is spearheading a collaborative effort along with Cheri Parr and Samtrans to develop a comprehensive transportaion plan which the Board is very interested in. Feel free to contact me directly if you would like to this discuss further.
Charlie
Page 2 of 3 pages < 1 2 3 >
Facebook
Twitter
RSS